hankyoreh

In a Senate confirmation hearing yesterday, Ron Kirk, the nominee for United States trade representative, said of the South Korea-U.S. free trade agreement that “the current status quo simply isn’t acceptable.” He added that it was a mistake to write off concerns that Americans are losing jobs because of trade as simple protectionism. While it goes against general international practice, he appeared to find the whole agreement problematic, reflecting the situation of economic crisis.

It thus appears inevitable that there will be revisions to the FTA in some form or another. If this happens, the foundation will weaken for the South Korean government’s argument for early ratification. Thus far, the government and ruling party have argued for quick ratification, their logic being that we must ratify the FTA first if we are to apply pressure so that a ratification bill is passed in the United States. They also opened up the beef market at last year’s South Korea-U.S. summit, endangering the people’s health and handing over the rights to survival for livestock farms, for the sake of the FTA. But chances are slim that the Democratic Party-led administration and Congress in the United States will go the way our government wishes. The most realistic course, and the one best suited to our national interests, is to stop fixating on early ratification and engage in a total reexamination of this agreement.

It is even more ridiculous to say that the United States found the content of the agreement problematic because it ended up being more beneficial for South Korea. The South Korea-U.S. FTA was an unfair agreement pulled around by the United States from the get-go. First and foremost, there was not sufficient assessment of its effects or collection of opinions within South Korea. The United States’ changes in approach have reaped many rewards, including the major preconditions that included the screen quota, but they appear to be dissatisfied with this and hope to get even more.

Among the things cited by the government as results of signing the South Korea-U.S. FTA are trade expansion effects, but the effects of increased trade and improved productivity have been shown to be grossly inflated. Agriculture and pharmaceuticals would be rendered almost defenseless, and their industries could be leveled. Furthermore, if the United States comes to involve itself in every aspect of the policy-making process, citing “investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms,” our government’s position will only get narrower and narrower.

The largest issues currently confronting our economy are jobless growth and deepening social polarization, and the South Korea-U.S. FTA will only make these worse. To say now, as we are paying the costs of excessive openness, that openness is the only way to survive is not only foolish, it’s dangerous. Rather than making do now as though the economy will survive if only the FTA is signed, the government needs to rectify the toxic items and other misguided parts of the agreement.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]